Fuji X10 RAW

Why supports iphoto on the new iPad the Fuji X10 RAW and a professional software like Aperture not?

I don't think iPhoto on iPad "supports" the Fuji X10.  I think it's just displaying the embedded JPEG preview and not the actual RAW data.

Similar Messages

  • Fuji X10 raw image distorted

    Adobe raw for the fuji X10 outputs a distorted image, the image is also cropped horizontally.
    When opening a X10 raw file (.RAF) in adobe raw, the following unexpected results:
    about 3% is cropped from horizontal field of view (symmetrical, both sides)
    the image is then "stretched" to fit the horizontal resolution
    the status indicates a dimension of 6144 x 4608 pixels (the open dialog showed 4000 x 3000)
    the image is stored as 6144 x 4608 pixels
    Attached are 2 images, 1 converted by the camera, the other by adobe raw.
    Converted by camera:
    Converted by adobe raw (version 6.6.0.261):
    I find this quite annoying. Does anyone know how to fix this?
    Thanks.

    You are right!
    Somewhere in the raw process with both silky and ACR converters pixels at each side are discarded. The pixels of about 1 cm of the yardstick (see picture) are not used. The camera's converter does utilise these pixels, BUT squeezes the image to a 0.96 : 1 ratio. This ratio is 1:1 longer focal lengths, the "pixel loss" is then nearly 0.
    The pixels might not be output to the raw file or are discarded by the convertors. Perhaps this is done because of quality degradation of corner pixels / coverage at short focal lengths. I'll test to see if it is also related to aperture. NOT an adobe raw issue I should say.
    Lower half of image: more pixels at the sides with jpg from camera
    Image is squeezed when processed by camera
    Original image, 28mm, F2.0

  • Fuji X10 RAW demosaic / sharpening quality

    The Fuji X10 still has in Lightroom 4 this original poor sharpening with lots of reticulation.
    We have been promised that this poor aspects which may result from an incomplete
    demosaicing, would be scrutinized a little more carefully in upcoming releases.
    It seems like this has not happened yet in LR 4.1 RC2 and knowing that the development team
    has other priorities in complex demosaicing (Fuji X-Pro1), it may be good that the team also have a look
    at this with Fuji to get this fixed.
    Can someone in the development team can provide us some info/status on that?

    The 4.1 update did not resolve the issue.
    The DPReview in depth review has been published and, for the first time ever, I read that the camera generated JPG outperforms the developed Raw file by a large margin, mostly due the radically different non-Bayer sensor design.
    I'm going on vacation in less than a week. I'll be shooting Raw+JPG knowing that, for the most of the shoots, I'll be going for the JPG version.
    This is a serious issue for general workflow, where JPG version is meant to be treated as ready made preview while waiting for the Raw file to be demosaicized. Now the Raw and the JPG shouldnt be treated as a whole, because of the difference in size and quality. They become effectively two different shots. I can't rely on proper camera calibration for the Raw alone, so the look&feel of the photos I'll take with th X10 won't be as homogeneous as expected.
    To tell the truth the X10 is just a walk around camera I bought for casual occasions and for my best half. My D300 will do the heavy lifting. I naively thought that I could have treated my X10 Raw files as any other NEF. Just normalize and add a bit of spice. I was wrong.
    Let me state that I admire so much the work of Eric and his collegues. Lightroom is a piece of art. X10 support, however, is mediocre at best.

  • Fuji X10 RAW support on the way?

    Are there any information regarding the support of the new Fujifilm X10 RAW files?
    Unfortunately the RAF files are not the same like the X100.
    There are already some rumors out there, that Apple is not going to support the X10...

    I must admit - I am getting more and more tired of being an apple slave.
    They published the latest camera update for aperture:
    Canon PowerShot S100
    Nikon 1 J1
    Nikon 1 V1
    Nikon COOLPIX P7100
    Olympus PEN E-PL1s
    Olympus PEN E-PL3
    Olympus PEN E-PM1
    Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ150
    Sony Alpha NEX-5N
    Sony Alpha SLT-A65
    Sony Alpha SLT-A77
    Still no RAW support for Fuji X10 - well done Apple!

  • Fuji X10 Raw Files

    Is it posible to find out if Apple intend issuing an update to Aperture 3 to process Raw files from a Fuji X10 camera.

    Yes, you will lose a lot of resolution by using Adobe DNG or any other third party Raw Converter.
    For best results, use the in-camera Raw Converter.
    I suggest that you read and digest the following:
    The dpreview Fuji X10 Review
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x10/
    Extract;
    We appreciate in-camera Raw conversion in any camera, but with the X10, this control is absolutely crucial. Why? Because third party support for the X10's raw files is far from universal among the more popular raw converters on the market. And even worse, among the raw converters that do support the EXR sensor, the results are disappointing.
    The inevitable downside to a non-standard sensor design is that it requires a different set of demosaicing algorithms for optimum results. In the raw converters we've used - including the SilkyPix version that ships with the camera - image resolution and fine detail are significantly worse than the X10's in-camera JPEGs. The converted Raw files appear very soft and are clearly not displaying the best image quality the sensor can produce. You can see this for yourself on both the Raw mode and studio comparison pages of this review. As it stands, you get significantly better image quality in terms of sharpness and resolution from processing Raw files in-camera than you do with external software.
    Try using the X10 settings recommended in this article:
    http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9060476058/fuji-x10-exr-camera-suggestions-for- optimum-performance.
    Regards,
    iPentax

  • Fuji x10 RAW support form july 2013 ?

    Hello, I just find out that the raw file form my fuji x10 was not supported any more. But they was after raw update 4.05. Strange no ? Stranger the raw file disapear from iPhoto.

    The list of supported cameras is here:
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5371
    fuji x10 has never been officially supported; the raw update 4.05 http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1629
    added
              Fujifilm X20
              Fujifilm X100S
              Fujifilm X-E1
              Fujifilm X-Pro1
    It was an accident, that it also worked for fuji X10.  Have you send feedback, that you want that "feature" back?

  • Raw update breaks camera support for Fuji X10 raw file.

    Just a headsup, do not update!

    Only Apple can asnwer the "Why?" questions, I'm afriad.
    Aperture menu -> Provide Aperture Feedback and let them know you want it.

  • Fuji x10 with EXR sensor - Is there RAW support in Lightroom 5

    Hello,
    I am about to purchase the Fuji x10 because now you can get them at a very reasonable price. I prefer shooting in RAW and I found out that there is a problem with the new Fuji EXR sensor. When I do an online research about this fine camera I read a lot about problems that RAW converters have with this special Fuji EXR sensor and the poor results you get when developing the Fuji RAW files. I can read in the Adobe list that Lightroom supports the Fuji x10 but does this mean that Adobe solved the problems with the EXR sensor in Lightroom 5?
    Is there anybody who developes Fuji x10 RAW files with the latest Lightroom 5 version and can tell me what results she or he gets?
    Shooting JPGs only wouldn't be a solution for me, so I really hope Adobe found a way to deal with this EXR sensor.
    Thanks for every help and good advice.
    Conroy

    Those are new profiles created by Adobe to emulate the conversion that is done by the Fujifilm Camera firmware that processes the raw data in the camera. They are profiles for processing the RAW data. Adobe also provides a standard Profile specific to the x10 for the processing of the raw data, it is labeled "Adobe Standard".
    The only way you will be know if you will be happy with the processing of Fujifilm RAW files by Lightroom is by doing what ssprengel advises, get some raw files from the x10 and test for yourself.
    Looking at the camera "Review" of the x10 done in 2012 almost 2 years ago by DPReview I would say the ACR/LR processing or raw files from the x10 got a sub-standard review. Since that time ACR/LR have created new profiles and the only way to satisfy your self is to do some testing. The profile referred to above have been produced after the 2012 review so should provide improved results.
    If you need some more info from Fujifilm users you can think about posting in the forum for Fujifilm Camera in the DPReview forum see the link below.
    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1020?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_med ium=text&ref=mainmenu

  • Why is no support for raw file of fuji x10 from Apple ?

    I have waiting for sometime for the update to support fuji x10 raw file from Apple. Please make it happen .

    We can't.  This is a user to user forum.   You can sign up for a free online developer account on http://developer.apple.com/ and submit a bug report on http://bugreporter.apple.com/
    You can request Fuji to do the same.
    You can check the complete listing of RAW updates on:
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4757
    If you look there the x100 is supported, but no x10 for Lion.   So the chances of x10 on Snow Leopard support is that much more remote, since Apple typically builds on their support with each new operating system.

  • Any news on Fuji x10 support?

    Any news or workarounds for Fuji x10 RAW images?
    Thanks!
    Steve

    Interesting. He evidently has access to beta versions that the rest of us don't.
    http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2011/11/lightroom-3-6-and-camera-raw-6-6-available -on-adobe-labsoe.html
    If Sean Reid is telling the truth, then the odds of x10 support being in the final 3.6 version just went up a bit.
    Hal

  • Why no RAW support for Fuji X10?

    The Fuji X10 has been on the market for almost a year now and there still is no RAW support for it in Aperture. Why?

    Only Apple can asnwer the "Why?" questions, I'm afriad.
    Aperture menu -> Provide Aperture Feedback and let them know you want it.

  • New RAW support for Fuji X10 camera

    I really appreciate all the work that must be done at Adobe in order to keep up with new cameras and their un-ending parade of new RAW file formats. Case in point, the new Fuji X10. RAW support was added for this model in the most recent Lightroom/Photoshop update and I was very glad for that since I acquired a new X10 just a couple of weeks ago. However, I am not able to get a handle on the noise reduction and sharpening aspects of the RAW files from the X10. Is it possible that since Fuji uses a non-typical array on their EXR sensor inside the camera that the usual sharpening and noise reduction controls are not adequate? They produce some very strange and inpleasant results. It's really puzzling since I have been a ACR user for many years with other camera makes and models and have always been able to optimize the RAW files in such a way as to better the camera's JPEG output. Not so with the X10. I should note that all the other adjustable parameters seem to work as would be expected when processing RAW files from the X10. It's just the Noise and Sharpaning parameters which do not seem to work very well. At least not as well as the camera's own internal noise and sharpening processing does. Suggestions? Maybe I'm misssing something, but I think I have tried every combination of adjustment possible from within Lightroom to try and improve the noise and sharpening from X10 files, but with very little success. It actually seems to work better to re-process out of camera JPEGs or "in camera processed" RAW files. At least the results from these files act more like one would expect, but this does give up much of the flexibility of working directly on a RAW file especially in areas such as recovering highlight detail, etc.
    Hope someone can provide some answers!
    Tom

    Exactly my experience, plus blue/cyan difficult to get right, on 2 (Apple) computers/monitors...OOC jpegs are good, more easily processed, what gives?

  • Fuji X10 & Camera Raw

    I know every time a new camera comes out someone asks the same question but anyway:
    When will Camera Raw support the newly released Fuji X10?
    As we really need saving from having to use Silkypix

    <My Opinion>
    I feel photography is more akin to art than science, or at least has a foot firmly planted on both sides of that fence.
    Since displays and prints can hardly be imagined to emulate the light and color dynamics of true reality, I feel the use of the word "accurate" as describes color is often misleading.  I might be willing to support "consistent", but my experience says that accurate color is in practice a red herring, and even consistent color is elusive.
    In short, those who try for accurate color often achieve lousy looking color instead.  Kind of an "operation was a success but the patient died" kind of thing.  It may make them feel good somehow inside to think the RGB numbers are right, but the reality is that the image actually suffers.  Then, as Vit points out, sometimes we even find out those golden numbers weren't actually "right" (by today's definition) either.  To me it just seems silly.
    I'll go so far as to say it seems to me it's virtually a necessity to develop a non-Adobe profile with an artistic eye to get good color and even consistent color.  It has been that way for me, in my experience with Camera Raw and the equipment I've used.
    In that vein, if a DNG can contain data provided by a camera maker that produces color that's consistent with the color they produce in the camera or in their own converter software (which is what sold us on that particular brand/model), then it would likely be a Good Thing not to have an Adobe-developed profile involved.  Perhaps this is the missing link I've been needing.  If that's the case, more power to Adobe's efforts to get manufacturers to use DNG!
    I really don't wish to step on the toes of folks who feel Adobe's profiles are good.  More power to you if you do!  I just haven't found much joy in them myself.
    </My Opinion>
    -Noel

  • Fuji (X10) EXR support bugged

    Lightroom supports Fuji X10 EXR RAF files since version 4 Beta (and v3.6), but unfortunately it is not working properly. There are two different EXR modes and Lightroom seems to support both, but the outcome is not right.
    1) Loading 6 MP EXR DR (200/400) mode where images of the two sensor halves are saved in the RAF file leads to wrong colors. Specifically the attenuated highlights of the longer exposed half are turned to purple while they should at least be neutral grey (attenuated clipped white). There also are color artifacts on the edges between the two blended halves when clipped highlights are present.
    Generally I would like to be able to have more control over the whole blending process and especially be able to get more information out of clipped highlights. Both Lightroom and the in-camera JPGs just ungracefully attenuate clipped whites from the longer exposed half to gray, but do *not* use the unclipped information of the shorter exposed half to get more information out of them.
    Even though Capture One also doesn't give any control over the blending process I was able to pull out detail/information from those highlights while in Lightroom I can only turn bright purple into dark purple regardless of whatever exposure relevant slider I use.
    2) Loading 12 MP full resolution RAF files generally works, but there is _less_ detail in them than in out-of-camera JPG, regardless of what filter/sharpness settings I tried. Lightrooms lens correction for the X10 works better than the in-camera one in that it does not compress the middle of the image (by cutting more off the sides), so in the middle there might be slightly mode detail out of Lightroom. But the rest of the image only gets detail on a level somewhere in between 6 MP ooc JPG and MP ooc JPG (meaning more detail than 6 MP, but less than 12 MP).
    I can imagine that the demosaicing process could be optimized, but another culprit might be Lightroom's sharpening method, especially where the "Detail" slider is concerned. The Detail slider seems to have a hard time with EXR pattern in general and especially EXR noise pattern. Increasing Detail on Lightroom's Sharpening filter mostly increases noise and quite considerably so. Especially on 12 MP full resolution files the labyrinth like noise pattern of the EXR images gets sharpened a lot by the Detail slider.
    LR's luminance filter seems to suffer from EXR specific noise patterns, too. Again it has a hard time finding the right balance of eliminating noise while keeping detail, at least compared to the in-camera noise filter (and some other RAW software I tried).
    One more thing that I am not sure about whether it is a problem of RAW software (aka LR) or the camera: While reds in JPG may either be somewhat oversaturated while at other times clip the red channel into turning reds to pink I noticed that in LR they may appear more orange. Pushing orange towards red via sliders helps with that, but I wonder if this is a form of misinterpretation by Lightroom or if the raw file really contains more orange than red information?
    Thanks for any answers in advance!

    "High Resolution" DR (ISO equal or higher than DR) in M size should be usable. L size is usable, too, but the detail is lacking (more than 6 mp, but less than 12 mp ooc JPGs). EXR DR RAW files are a special case. It's not easy to even create them with the camera, because you have to use RAW + JPG and ISO below DR and then shoot a situation where ISO below 400 is enough (broad daylight).
    And these files are usable, but colors are somewhat off in LR, which can at least partly be managed via HSL. It's not perfect, because highlights of the longer exposed sensor half are handled wrong (from my point of view), but I send some example images now. We need to give Chan some time, because I only sent the files a few days ago.
    One thing that doesn't work well between LR is EXR kind of noise and LR's sharpening. Some people called that "reticulation pattern" on the DPreview forum. What happens is that LR's sharpening tends to sharpen noise more distinct than anything else, so you need to keep that "Detail" slider down and overally watch sharpening. Also LR's luminance noise-reduction tends to remove more detail than the in-camera one and the color noise slider has to be used with caution in order to keep saturation (default value is too high).
    It's all workable, but not exactly in love with each other.

  • Fuji RAF (raw) files

    How do I use Fuji RAF (raw) files? What file do I need to download for my Photoshop CS5?
    Message was edited by: backlash2

    This is for the benefit of others who might find this thread.
    There is a list of the latest Camera Raw versions that can be used with a particular major release of Photoshop or Photoshop Elements here, in the Camera Raw FAQ:
    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/311515?tstart=0
    The Camera Raw versions listed in the FAQ (e.g., Camera Raw 6.2 for Elements 8) are the latest that can be installed in a particular editor version. 
    If that Camera Raw version is lower than the one listed at the link Trevor supplied above, then you'll need to either use the free DNG converter to convert your files to the DNG format before opening them in your image editor, or upgrade your image editor.
    -Noel

Maybe you are looking for